Rajasthan High Court
Shobhagmal Sakhalecha S/O Late ... vs Jeetmal Sakhalecha S/O Late Shri ... on 18 April, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1131/2022
Shobhagmal Sakhalecha S/o Late Shri Mangal Chand Ji
Sakhalecha, Aged About 77 Years, R/o Sakhalecha Bhawan,
Lakhan Kotri, Ajmer.
----Petitioner( Applicant/Respondent No.3)
Versus
1. Jeetmal Sakhalecha S/o Late Shri Mangal Chand Ji
Sakhalecha, R/o Flat No.212-B, Neelkanth Apartment,
Gokuldas, Parsi Road, Dadar East, Mumbai-400014 Hall
Devashish, M-24, Anasagar Link Road, Ajmer (Deceased)
A. Sh. Kirti Sakhalecha S/o Late Sh. Jeetmal Ji
Sakhalecha R/o 303 E, Gundecha Garden, Dataram
Khamkar Marg, Lal Bagh, Mumbai-400012.
B. Sh. Kishore Sakhalecha S/o Late Sh. Jeetmal Ji
Sakhalecha R/o 303 E, Gundecha Garden, Dataram
Khamkar Marg, Lal Bagh, Mumbai-400012.
C. Smt. Shakuntala Mehta D/o Late Sh. Jeetmal Ji
Sakhalecha R/o 501A, Maju Mahal, Pali Hill Road, Bandra
(West) Mumbai-400050.
D. Smt. Kusum Jain D/o Late Sh. Jeetmal Ji Sakhalecha
R/o 303 E, Gundecha Garden, Dataram Khamkar Marg,
Lal Bagh, Mumbai-400012.
(Plaintiff/Non Applicant)
2. Jaiwantmal Sakhalecha S/o Late Shri Mangal Chand Ji
Sakhalecha, R/o Devashish, M-24, Anasagar Link Road,
Ajmer.
A. Sh. Rajendra Kumar S/o Jaiwantmal Sakhalecha
B. Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jain S/o Jaiwantmal Sakhalecha
C. Smt. Chitra Jain D/o Jaiwantmal Sakhalecha
All R/o M-24, Anasagar Link Road, Ajmer.
3. Abhay Mal Sakhalecha S/o Late Shri Mangal Chand Ji
Sakhalecha, R/o Sakhalecha Rishabh Sadan, Ram Bhawan
Ke Samne, Jatiya Hills, Raimbul Road, Ajmer.
----(Non-Applicant/Respondent No. 1 &2)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.B. Sharma Ganthola
(2 of 4) [CW-1131/2022]
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishnu Kant Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
18/04/2022
For the reasons stated in the application filed by the
petitioner, the same is allowed. Service of respondents No.2/a,
2/b, 2/c & 3 is dispensed with at his risk.
On the request of leaned counsels for the respective parties,
the writ petition was heard on its merit at this stage.
This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India is directed against the order dated 22.12.2021 whereby, an
application filed by the petitioner/respondent No.3 under Order 8
Rule 1 (3) CPC, has been dismissed by the learned Additional
District Judge No.1, Ajmer.
The facts in brief are that in a suit filed by the respondent
No.1 for partition against the petitioner and the respondents No.2
& 3 in the year 2000, the petitioner filed his written statement in
the year 2002. On 20.10.2021, he filed an application under Order
8 Rule 1 (3) CPC seeking permission of this Court to place certain
documents on record which has been dismissed by the learned
trial Court vide order dated 22.12.2021, impugned herein.
Assailing the order, learned counsel for the petitioner
contended that the documents in question were relevant for just
and effective disposal of the controversy involved in the matter
and hence, it was imperative for learned trial Court to have taken
the same on record. He further submits that the reason for delay
in submission of the documents was mentioned in the application
itself which the learned trial Court failed to appreciate. He,
(3 of 4) [CW-1131/2022]
therefore, prayed that the writ petition be allowed and the
impugned order dated 22.12.2021 be set aside. He in support of
his submissions, relies upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India in case of Sugandhi (Dead) By Lrs. & Anr. versus P.
Rajkumar Rep. By his Power Agent Imam OLI: (2020) 10
SCC 706.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supporting
the findings recorded by the learned trial Court contended that
since the application came to be filed at the stage of final
arguments, it has rightly been dismissed. He, therefore, prayed
for dismissal of the writ petition.
Heard. Considered.
In the suit for partition wherein, the petitioner/defendant
No.3 has filed his written statement way back in the year 2002,
the application under Order 8 Rule 1 (3) CPC came to be filed as
late as on 20.10.2021 when the matter was fixed for final
arguments. This Court has gone through the contents of the
application filed by the petitioner and is not satisfied about the
reasons stated therein for delay in filing it. Indisputably, most of
the documents sought to be placed on record are antedated filing
of the written statement and no good reason has been assigned in
the application for not placing the same on record alongwith the
written statement or, for that matter, during course of trial. The
learned trial Court has assigned cogent reasons while dismissing
the application filed by the petitioner which does not suffer from
patent jurisdictional error warranting interference of this Court
under its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.
(4 of 4) [CW-1131/2022]
The writ petition is dismissed accordingly being devoid of
merit. The pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/17
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
